|
During the last two decades bilingual-bicultural education
programs (programs which recognize that children may come from a different
culture and speak a different language in the home than in the school)
have flourished in the United States as the ethnic composition of children
attending public schools has become more diverse. In the late 1980's discussion
of bilingual-bicultural education for children who are Deaf brought about
new theories. (A capital D is used by bilingual-bicultural programs to
identify deafness as a cultural, rather than a medical, issue.) According
to Schirmer (1994) "the impetus for implementing bilingual-bicultural
programs for children who are deaf comes from two sources: (1) The Deaf
community, who advocate for the right to pass on their language and culture
to succeeding generations; (2) the overall disappointing achievement of
youngsters who are deaf. (p. 98) Although small gains have been made in
the levels of reading achieved by the average child who is deaf, overall
achievement remains considerably lower compared to their hearing peers
despite ardent attempts to teach Deaf children through Total Communication
(see ERIC Digest E559) and oral approaches (see ERIC Digest E551).
Additional impetus for bilingual-bicultural programs
comes from Sweden, where, in 1981, after years of grassroots activism
by Deaf adults and parents of children who are Deaf, the Swedish Parliament
passed a law stating that people who are Deaf need to be bilingual in
order to function successfully in the family, school, and society (Mahshie,
1995). What does it mean to be bilingual-bicultural?
"A person who is bicultural can move freely within
and between two different cultures. Biculturalism implies an understanding
of the mores, customs, practices, and expectations of members of a cultural
group and the ability to adapt to their expectations" (Finnegan,
1992, p.1). Bilingualism involves the ability to use two different languages
successfully. Some individuals may be stronger in one language, some in
the other, some may blend the two languages into a pidgin (Maxwell, 1991).
Individuals who are Deaf are considered bilingual if they are able to
communicate effectively in both American Sign Language (ASL) and English
or the spoken language of their country. They are considered bicultural
if they are capable of functioning in both the Deaf community and the
majority culture.
Although there is no standardized formula defining bilingual-bicultural
programs, they are founded on a common set of principles. A basic premise
of bilingual-bicultural education is that all children should develop
communicative competency. This is a challenge because more than 90 percent
of children who are Deaf have hearing parents or caregivers who must learn
ASL as a second language.
Education programs that follow the bilingual-bicultural
philosophy work with parents/caregivers to help them realize the special
linguistic, educational, and social needs of their child(ren) who are
Deaf and to help them realize the importance of early language acquisition.
Deaf children who develop language late are less proficient than those
who develop an early first language (Newport & Sapulla, 1987). Helen
Neville's research at the Salk Institute's Laboratory for Cognitive Neuroscience
also shows that children must learn a language during their first five
years or so, before the brain's neural connections are locked in place,
or risk permanent linguistic impairment (Wolkomir, 1992). "What suffers
is the ability to learn grammar. As children mature, their brain organization
becomes increasingly rigid. By puberty, it is largely complete. This spells
trouble because most deaf youngsters learn language late; their parents
are hearing and do not know ASL, and the children have little or no contact
with deaf people when young." (p. 36)
Since it is the grammar of languages that distinguishes
them most significantly from one another (most spoken languages have similar
pragmatic or social functions and similar sound systems), the early assault
on the ability to learn grammar makes the development of a sound language
system even more compelling.
Bilingual-bicultural programs differ from other programs
most notably by their approach to first language acquisition. While bilingual-bicultural
programs have respect for both ASL and English, these programs advocate
for ASL to be the first language of children who are deaf. "Research
has shown that effective language has to be fast and clear. ASL is an
efficient language for visual learning and is easier for Deaf children
to acquire as a first language than any form of English" (Finnegan,
1992, p. 7). Johnson, Liddell, Ertling (1989) stated that ASL is the language
choice of adults who are deaf, and it offers access to the school curriculum
and other world knowledge. A solid foundation in a first language leads
to better English performance over time, and skills transfer from one
language to another.
Teaching ASL as the first language for Deaf children
has additional benefits. ASL is the language of Deaf people throughout
the United States. Proficiency in ASL automatically allows membership
in the Deaf community and in cultural events that occur in communities
where Deaf people live. This membership is vital to Deaf children because
it promotes a healthy view of who they are as human beings and increases
self-esteem and confidence in their abilities to interact in a wide array
of situations.
The bilingual-bicultural approach recognizes that ASL
and English are two distinct languages in the same way that, for example,
French and German are distinct languages. ASL is a complete language with
its own grammar, syntax, and rules for interaction. Signing ASL and speaking
English cannot be performed simultaneously with a great degree of success;
therefore, when signing ASL one should not attempt to speak English. Speaking
English when signing deteriorates the visual signal resulting in an inferior
production of signs as well as inferior use of spoken English. The goal
is clear and proficient production of ASL.
Proponents of the bilingual-bicultural approach believe
that Deaf children are not deficient. Instead of being auditory learners,
they are visual learners. Deaf children do not need remedial teaching
strategies because the bilingual-bicultural program provides a unique
visual learning environment in which their linguistic, cultural, and social
needs are met. Deaf teachers, administrators, and support staff are considered
valuable components of the bilingual-bicultural program. The bilingual-bicultural
approach does not support mainstreaming Deaf children in regular education
programs. Many Deaf adults have shared their stories of isolation and
academic deprivation while attending schools for children who can hear.
The bilingual-bicultural approach holds that cognitive, linguistic, and
social competence are best achieved in environments that provide full
communicative access to the curriculum.
Who can choose a bilingual-bicultural option?
Proponents of the bilingual-bicultural option feel that
all children, no matter what their degree of hearing loss, would benefit
from a bilingual-bicultural option. However, it is most likely that these
programs will exist separate from the mainstream education agencies and
buildings. Some may be residential, some may be day schools. Parents or
caregivers who feel that this approach is appropriate for their child
should call the residential school for Deaf children in their home state.
Although a growing number of schools for children who are deaf have adopted
bilingual-bicultural programming, families in rural areas may not have
access to this approach.
What are the benefits of a bilingual-bicultural option?
There are several benefits of bilingual-bicultural education.
Early access to comprehensible language fosters early cognitive development
which, in turn, promotes increased literacy and greater academic achievement.
Students who attend bilingual-bicultural programs develop functional skills
in two languages. The emphasis on early language acquisition and establishing
a first language (ASL) provides a base upon which English is subsequently
taught. Students in bilingual-bicultural programs have increased self-esteem
and confidence due to the healthy view of Deaf children, acceptance of
who they are as human beings, and increased confidence to function in
bilingual-bicultural environments.
What are the limitations of a bilingual-bicultural option?
Bilingual-bicultural programs in the United States are
still relatively new. Limited data are available regarding students' achievement
in these programs. As schools begin bilingual- bicultural programs, schools
may have difficulty recruiting native signers of ASL because their numbers
are limited. Further, while staff may have excellent skills in signed
English, they often do not have proficient ASL skills and must be retrained.
Some opposition may result in this effort. At this time, most university
education programs continue to prepare teachers of the deaf in the philosophy
of Total Communication. Generally, the level of sign language proficiency
required by most universities, states, and certifying agencies is inadequate.
Lack of ASL classes for parents or caregivers, especially
in rural areas, may severely restrict communication in the home. Without
fluent language models, Deaf children's language will be developed neither
optimally nor naturally.
What are some questions to ask in choosing this option?
How many of the educational staff are native
ASL signers and/or fluent ASL signers?
How are signing skills evaluated?
How is English developed?
When is English introduced in the curriculum?
What support is given to parents or caregivers to learn ASL?
How are children who developed language late or have limited language
proficiency treated in this type of program?
How does the curriculum compare to that of hearing children?
Where do you recruit staff?
How will I know if my child is progressing adequately?
|